Interoperability data for Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2012 Back to country selection

Options: Download PDF Download PDF

1. Interoperability as a strategic goal
(info)

This qualitative indicator examines whether Interoperability is recognized as a strategic priority, a fact which holds truth if the latter is explicitly mentioned in either one of the national e-Government, Interoperability, local e-Government, Digital Planning, IT or Information Society (etc.) strategies or other strategic framework of the country. In this case it is awarded the value “Yes”; otherwise the value “No”. In case there is no relevant information, the indicator is granted the value “Unknown”. A suitable justification is also provided depending on the case.

1.1. Strategic Priority on Interoperability Yes

Bosnia and Herzegovina does not have a National Interoperability Strategy. Nonetheless, interoperability of organizational units is foreseen as a course of action within the eGovernance development pillar of the Strategy for Information Society Development for the period 2004-2010, along with public administration re-engineering, technological and developmental basis, communication and IT infrastructure, security, fundamental registers, informalization of joint and specialized functions of the administration, e-democracy, electronic services, and portals and access points, under the prism of several of which it is also viewed as a prerequisite and critical factor for their achievement [1]. The Strategy acknowledges interoperability as key to implementation of eGovernance, and states more specifically, that “technical specifics and solutions should be defined with the aim of ensuring interoperability and coherence of the information systems in the public sector, which must be viewed as foundations to overall strategy of eGovernance development” [1].
Remarkable is also the fact, that the concept of interoperability appears in several other pillars of the Strategy, while among the activities foreseen, there are the definition of concepts and standards for IT interoperability in the public sector, the implementation of an interoperability project to verify and render operational the interoperability concept, as well as the establishment of an IT Interoperability Forum [1]. The same notion is delivered in the Action Plan for Information Society Development in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which complements the aforementioned strategy [2].
Additionally, similar activities as well as the establishment of an eGovernment Interoperability Framework are foreseen in the National Strategy and Action Plan of Public Administration Reform [3, 4].
Interestingly, in both the aforementioned strategies there is a persistent focus on the need to guarantee interoperability of public registers, in order to provide cross-organizational and transactional services. A strategy on public registers, enclosing the solutions for harmonization and interoperability of the latter, is thus to be developed [3, 4].

(info)

This indicator investigates the status of a National Interoperability Strategy. The latter may be absent, and thus “Not planned”, “Planned”, “Under development” or already “Published”. In case no information is available, the National Interoperability Strategy Status is attributed the value “Unknown”.

1.2. National Interoperability Strategy Status Not planned
2. National Interoperability Frameworks
(info)

National Interoperability Frameworks prove that a country is interoperability-aware and pose as the cornerstone for the resolution of interoperability issues in the public sector and the provision of one-stop, fully electronic services to businesses and citizens. In this context, this indicator examines the status of a National Interoperability Framework by aggregating information on a series of relevant aspects, namely title, version, release date, focus/scope, audience, status and responsible agency.

2.1. National Interoperability Framework Status
(info)

                             

2.1.1. Title Not applicable
(info)

  

2.1.2. Version Not applicable
(info)

   

2.1.3. Release Date Not applicable
(info)

  

2.1.4. Focus / Scope Not applicable
(info)

  

2.1.5. Audience Not applicable
(info)

  

2.1.6. Status Planned

The Interoperability Framework development was tendered in April 2009, by the Public Administration Reform Coordinator’s Office, but unsuccessfully [5].
According to the National Strategy of Public Administration Reform [3] an eGovernment Interoperability Framework is to be developed by 2010, however, there is not available information whether the necessary procedures have commenced or the development of the framework is still in the stage of planning.

(info)

  

2.1.7. Responsible Agency Unknown
(info)

This qualitative metric investigates whether a country’s National Interoperability Framework is harmonized with the European Interoperability Framework (EIF), that has been issued by the IDABC (“Interoperable Delivery of European e-Government Services to Public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens”) initiative, or not.
The indicator is applicable when a country’s NIF has already been published. In case the country’s NIF is in line with the European Interoperability Framework, the indicator is awarded the value ”Yes” ; otherwise the value “No”.  In case there is no relevant information, the indicator is granted the value “Unknown”. A suitable justification is also provided depending on the case.

2.2. Compatibility of National Interoperability Framework with the European Interoperability Framework Not applicable

(The establishment of an IT interoperability framework for the BiH public sector, harmonized with the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) constitutes a long term priority according to the National Strategy for Public Administration Reform and Action Plan.)

3. Interoperability Projects and Activities
(info)

This indicator brings the evaluation of interoperability efforts down to the practical level and rates the National Interoperability-related Activity of a country by means of the number of relevant projects of national or local scope. These are mainly e-Government projects, where interconnection, integration or interoperability have a central role. Both ongoing and completed projects are taken into consideration. The indicator is measured in a qualitative four level scale including the levels “Non-existent”, “Low/limited”, “Moderate” and “High”. A quite descriptive but non-exhaustive list of national interoperability-related projects is also provided, in order to offer a more clear view on the relevant activities.Values:

  • Non-existent: no projects
  • Low: 1-5 projects
  • Moderate: 6-20 projects
  • High: over 20 projects
3.1. Number of interoperability-related projects of local or national scope Moderate

National-Public Administration Portal: -


E-Government Backbone:

  • eGovernment at the Council of Ministers BiH (Sep 2006 – Sep 2008), to enhance the efficiency of BiH Council of Ministers through the introduction of a secure networking system and basic communication and collaboration services that will interconnect all Ministries and departments within the CoM, and increase the capacity of the Government to manage grant resources, through the establishment and successful functioning of a system for the registry and reporting of grants assistance made available to the public sector in BiH [3].

 

Research & Education Network: 

  • SIF (Schools Interoperability Framework) project, with the objective of standardization in the field of Education Management Information Systems [1].

 

Environmental Geoportal: -


Marine Data Management Infrastructure: -


Legislation & e-Justice System:

  • HJPC (High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council) project, targeting the creation of a single information and communication space for all courts and prosecution offices, as well as the establishment of a case management system and judicial documentation centre, and with the view of being linked with the CIPS database [5].

 

e-Health System: -

 

e-Tax Portal & Infrastructure: -

 

Other projects:

  • CIPS (Citizen Identification Protection System) project, targeting the issuance of new identity cards, meeting the EU standards, as well as the development of the necessary infrastructure, central database and re-organization of relevant procedures, to enable communication and shared access to a common set of data between the central unit and a number of remote locations where the ID cards are issued, and faster service delivery respectively [5].
  • RIC (Regional Information Centre), a multipurpose information-communication and service centre, in Herzegovina, to provide services to SMEs and micro businesses in the region, based upon the creation and operation of a network of 22 First Stop Shops in 22 municipalities, connected with RIC. RIC has established a business directory of 18000 SMEs, as well as of all business zones in Herzegovina [6].
  • SPIRA (Streamlining Permits and Inspection Regime) project, to eliminate barriers delaying the registration of unincorporated businesses and allow entering the market in only a single day [7].
  • HRMIS (Human Resources Management Information System, started in Oct 2006), to support horizontal function of human resources management throughout the public administration at the BiH level, by facilitating human resource planning, recruitment, training and the full range of associated functions, automating the most frequent human resource management procedures at the level of individual institutions and building human resource management capacity, based on personnel files, kept in the HRMIS database, and providing vertical integration of data to allow the Civil Service Agency to operate effectively [2, 4]. (UNDP Good Practice Label)
  • e-Archive Portal of the Ministry of Communications and Transport, to solve problems that arise in the process of managing cases and documents in the administrative office [8].
  • Digitalization and Informatization of Cultural Heritage of Bosnia and Herzegovina, this project includes mainly the: i. digital capture and transformation from analogue to digital form, ii. describing and representations of heritage objects and documentation about them, iii. processing of digitized content, iv. presentation and long term preservation of digitized content (http://www.digi.ba) [8].

 

 

(info)

This metric captures the degree of a country’s engagement with EU research and development (R&D) activities, and provides therefore an indication of the number of EU-funded interoperability-related projects in which the country participates. Both ongoing and completed research projects are taken into consideration. The same four level qualitative scale is used in this case as well, while an indicative list of EU-funded projects is also included. Values:

  • Non-existent: no projects
  • Low: 1-5 projects
  • Medium: 6-20 projects
  • High: over 20 projects
3.2. Number of EU-funded interoperability-related projects Non-existent
3.2.1. Indicative projects
Not applicable
4. National Interoperability Practices
(info)

This metric provides an indication of the number of interoperability cases with a good practice label that have been implemented by a country. These are projects and other activities that have resulted in the development of innovative, flexible and reconfigurable interoperability solutions with an appreciable impact in terms of users’ uptake, a series of articulated benefits (e.g. managerial, financial, cultural etc.), and a number of patterns and components that may be either reused in other activities within the country or in other countries, or that can be exploited for educational and/or benchmarking purposes. Values:

  • Non-existent: no cases
  • Low: 1-5 cases
  • Medium: 6-20 cases
  • High: over 20 cases
4.1. Number of Interoperability Cases with Good Practice Label Low
  • HRMIS (Human Resources Management Information System, started in Oct 2006), to support horizontal function of human resources management throughout the public administration at the BiH level, by facilitating human resource planning, recruitment, training and the full range of associated functions, automating the most frequent human resource management procedures at the level of individual institutions and building human resource management capacity, based on personnel files, kept in the HRMIS database, and providing vertical integration of data to allow the Civil Service Agency to operate effectively. (UNDP Good Practice Label)
(info)

In the frame of this indicator, one interoperability case with a good practice label is selected as the most important or indicative one and is described with regard to a series of aspects including title, status, interoperability aspects covered and impact.

4.2. Best Interoperability Practice
(info)

  

4.2.1. Title HRMIS (Human Resources Management Information System)
(info)

  

4.2.2. Description

HRMIS (Human Resources Management Information System, started in Oct 2006), to support horizontal function of human resources management throughout the public administration at the BiH level, by facilitating human resource planning, recruitment, training and the full range of associated functions, automating the most frequent human resource management procedures at the level of individual institutions and building human resource management capacity, based on personnel files, kept in the HRMIS database, and providing vertical integration of data to allow the Civil Service Agency to operate effectively.

(info)

         

4.2.3. Status

Operational

(info)

   

4.2.4. Indicative interoperability aspects covered
  • Business Process Management
  • Data Repositories
  • Back-office systems
  • Business Process Rules
(info)

Brief description of benefits, reusable components, patterns and lessons learnt from the particular IOP case.

4.2.5. Impact

Benefits - Reusable Components – Patterns:

  • A modern human resource management information system that allows to strategically manage the human capital of the BiH public administration.
  • Capability to optimize and align the workforce in institutions, and improve its responsiveness, productivity and efficiency.
  • Provision of centralized and personalized information, operational intelligence and delivery of answers to complex questions.
  • Recruitment module, with a web front-end to be used by the public and easy-to-use functionalities for the job seeker.
  • Employee Self Service module, allowing government employees to change personal data (e.g. contact information), apply for time off, view their history, apply for training etc.

 

Lessons Learnt:

  • If dynamic changes are expected in the business process rules, flexibility is a must when specifying software requirements. Having in mind that HRM processes are far from being completed, optimized and harmonized, the driving force during functional requirements specification was that the HRMIS needs to be built extremely flexible. Flexibility of HRMIS should not be compromised even in order to increase the level of automation of HR processes, meaning that certain responsibilities are to  remain in the user, and his/her knowledge of HRM rules and regulations will continue to be essential.
  • Future users are (usually) the best experts. The project team held several workshops with HR practitioners from institutions. Participants identified all HR processes and then specified data and reporting requirements. A prototype database was available to play with, to trigger additional ideas. Participants came prepared having samples of documents needed in their daily work.
  • Political leadership is more important than technical leadership. To overcome the resistance to change that may come from top management and employees, an appropriate attitude, sensitivity to users concerns and good communication, rather than technical competence and expertise are needed.
5. e-Government Interoperability
(info)

This indicator reveals the degree of interoperability that reaches the final recipients of public services, aka citizens and businesses, in terms of fully automated and proactive service delivery. The indicator is based on the “Full Online Availability” benchmark introduced by Capgmenini to assess the 20 basic services (12 services for citizens and 8 services for businesses) against the fourth and fifth stages of the 5-stage maturity model, where stage 4 (transaction) corresponds to full electronic case handling, requiring no other formal procedure from the applicant via “paperwork”, and stage 5 (targetisation) provides an indication of the extent, by which front- and back-offices are integrated, data is reused and services are delivered proactively. The reference year is also provided.

5.1. Interoperability Level of core e-Government services to citizens / businesses 36.0%
(info)

The term “Connected Government” is used in the e-Government Survey of the United Nations (2008) within the frame of the Web Measure Index in order to describe the situation in which governments transform themselves into a connected entity that responds to the needs of its citizens by developing an integrated back office infrastructure. In this context, the indicator “Connected Government Status” expresses the percentage of services, which are provided in Stage V “Connected”, based on the information on Service Delivery by Stages 2008, included in the e-Government Survey as well. The reference year is also provided.

5.2. Connected Government Status 0.0%
6. e-Business Interoperability
(info)

Focusing on a typical aspect of the enterprise sector’s operation i.e. information sharing, this metric provides an indication of the intra-organizational integration level that characterizes the latter in terms of the percentage of enterprises in which information on sales or on purchases is shared electronically among the different internal functions (e.g. management of inventory levels, accounting, production or services management, distribution management etc.). All enterprises which use a computer with 10 or more persons employed are included (without financial sector). The year of the data is also provided.

6.1. Intra-organizational Integration Level Not available
(info)

The cross-organization integration level of the enterprise sector is expressed as the percentage of enterprises that use automated data exchange between their own and other ICT systems outside the enterprise group. All enterprises which use a computer with 10 or more persons employed are included (without financial sector). The year of the data is also provided.

6.2. Cross-organization Integration Level Not available
(info)

This indicator goes beyond the aspect of information exchange and investigates the cross-organization application-to-application integration level in the enterprise sector, based on the percentage of enterprises, whose business processes are automatically linked to those of their suppliers and/or customers. All enterprises which use a computer with 10 or more persons employed are included (without financial sector). The year of the data is also provided.

6.3. Cross-organization Application-to-Application Integration Level 4.0%
(info)

Considering e-Invoicing as another aspect of e-Business Interoperability, this metric measures the percentage of enterprises that send and/or receive electronic invoices. All enterprises which use a computer with 10 or more persons employed are included (without financial sector). The year of the data is also provided.

6.4. e-Invoicing Status 4.0%
(info)

This indicator examines the B2B data standards usage measuring the percentage of companies that use EDI-based, XML-based, propietary or other technical standards. The year of the data is also provided.

6.5. B2B Data Standards Usage
6.5.1. EDI-based standards Not available
6.5.2. XML-based standards Not available
6.5.3. Proprietary standards Not available
6.5.4. other technical standards Not available
(info)

Interoperability awareness is examined in terms of the percentage of companies saying that interoperability is important for e-business within their sector, between sectors or for producing or providing products and services The year of the data is also provided.

6.6. Interoperability Awareness
6.6.1. Within their sector Not available
6.6.2. Between sectors Not available
6.6.3. For producing or providing products and services Not available